Karnataka High Court
Ashwaq Khan vs The State Of Karnataka on 6 February, 2025
Author: Mohammad Nawaz
Bench: Mohammad Nawaz
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:5529
CRL.P No. 347 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 347 OF 2025
(439(Cr.PC) / 483(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
ASHWAQ KHAN,
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,
NO. 1/61, 2ND FLOOR, 3RD CROSS,
3RD MAIN, N.G. PALYA, B.G. ROAD,
BANGALORE CITY - 560 029.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SANJAY YADAV B, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY S. G. PALYA P.S., BENGALURU,
Digitally
REPRESENTED BY ITS
signed by STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
LAKSHMI T
Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
High Court
of Karnataka HIGH COURT BUILDING,
BANGALORE - 560 001.
2. SRI. SYED ALEEM
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
NO. 20, D STREET, BEHIND BANGKOK STYLE,
CLOTH SHOPE, BENGALURU - 560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. RANGASWAMY R, HCGP FOR R1;
R2 - SERVED)
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:5529
CRL.P No. 347 of 2025
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 OF CR.P.C (U/S 483 BNSS)
PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED ON BAIL IN
CR.NO.432/2024 REGISTERED BY THE COMPLAINANT
SUDDAGUNTEPALYA P.S., BANGALORE CITY, FOR ALLEGED
OFFENCES P/U/S 4, 5(L), 5(m), 6 OF THE POCSO ACT, 2012,
PENDING ON THE FILE OF ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS
JUDGE, FTSC-1, BENGALURU.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ
ORAL ORDER
This petition under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 is
preferred by the petitioner to enlarge him on bail in Crime
No.432/2024 of Suddaguntepalya Police Station,
Bengaluru City, registered for offences punishable under
Section 4, 5(l), 5(m) and 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012.
2. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner,
learned High Court Government Pleader for the State and
perused the material on record.
NC: 2025:KHC:5529
3. Respondent No.2 / defacto complainant is
served but unrepresented.
4. In the complaint lodged by Sri. Syed Aleem, he
has alleged that he noticed his son deeply disturbed during
his sleep and on enquiry, he revealed that his grand
father, i.e., the petitioner herein, has sexually harassed
him when he had been to his house during Dasara
holidays. Complaint was lodged on 12.12.2024, based on
which the aforementioned crime is registered against the
petitioner.
5. Learned counsel for petitioner has contended
that the entire allegations are false and the petitioner is
innocent. The incident is alleged to have taken place in the
month of October, 2024, whereas, the complaint is lodged
on 12.12.2024, after a delay of 2 months. Hence, there is
an inordinate delay in lodging the complaint and
therefore, false implication of petitioner cannot be ruled
out.
NC: 2025:KHC:5529
6. It is his further contention that the victim has
been examined by the doctor after 60 days and therefore,
the medical report pertaining to the victim cannot be
accepted. Petitioner has been targeted due to personal
enmity at the behest of complainant's wife, as she is the
daughter of the petitioner, born through his first wife, who
is separated from the petitioner. He contended that
petitioner is in judicial custody since 13.12.2024 and his
further detention will not serve any purpose.
7. Learned counsel has relied on a decision of the
High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam reported in 2019 SCC
Online Ker 1407, and contended that under similar
circumstance, bail has been granted to the accused.
Accordingly, sought to allow the petition and enlarge the
petitioner on bail.
8. Prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by
the learned High Court Government Pleader. He contended
that the offence committed by the petitioner is heinous in
nature. Wherein, he being the grand-father of the victim
NC: 2025:KHC:5529
boy, aged only 11 years, has committed sexual assault on
him. He contended that the statement of the victim has
been recorded under Section 183 of BNSS and medical
report also confirms the heinous act committed by the
petitioner. He further contended that considering the
relationship between the petitioner and the victim, there
are chances of threatening the victim in case, the
petitioner is enlarged on bail. He has therefore, sought to
reject the petition.
9. As per complaint averments, the victim was
found deeply disturbed during sleep and on repeated
enquiry, he revealed that the petitioner herein, his grand
father, has repeatedly harassed him sexually when he had
been to his house during Dasara holidays. It is stated, the
petitioner was threatening the victim saying he will be
killed, if the matter is revealed to others and he even
pressed his neck and forced him to do blow job.
10. The delay, if any, in lodging the complaint in a
case of this nature is not a ground, at this stage, to doubt
NC: 2025:KHC:5529
the veracity of the statement of the victim, recorded under
Section 183 of BNSS, 2023. The medical report of the
victim indicates that anal bleeding has been noticed by the
doctor. Investigation is in progress. The date of birth of
the victim is 08.04.2014 and therefore, he was only aged
about 11 years at the time of incident. As rightly
contended by the learned High Court Government Pleader,
there are chances of tampering the victim and other
witnesses in case the petitioner is granted bail.
11. In the judgment relied on by the petitioner,
accused therein was granted bail considering that he was a
person aged 70 years and is having various illness
including cardiac ailments requiring regular medication
and medal consultation. The said judgment is not
applicable to the present case.
12. Learned counsel for petitioner has submitted
that the petitioner's mother is old aged woman and she is
suffering from various ailments. However, since the
NC: 2025:KHC:5529
investigation is in progress, this is not a fit case to enlarge
the petitioner on bail.
13. Petitioner is at liberty to move the Sessions
Court once the charge sheet is filed. Petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
(MOHAMMAD NAWAZ)
JUDGE
LDC
CT: BHK
